Wikipedia talk:Requests for arbitration/PoolGuy/Workshop

I am sorry if my posts to this page are not appropriate. So much went wrong with this situation, there are many things that should have been handled differently. Please let me know if this was not the appropriate place. PoolGuy 05:58, 1 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

pgk, you state the violation was stated many times [1]. Where? Please refrain from making false statements. People who don't research might believe your false statements. PoolGuy 04:56, 7 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

pgk, you stated on my talk page [2], and now here [3] that I have harassed Nlu. Please read the evidence page where I have clearly demonstarted that Nlu has not been harassed and he in fact has been the one pursuing [4]. Please refrain from making baseless accusations. People who don't research might believe your false statements. PoolGuy 04:56, 7 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

pgk, you ask if there is any evidence of Admins not researching an issue before taking action. Of course there is. I don't make unresearched comments.

• On March 24 at 4:55 GoldToeMarionette requested an unblock [5].
• Three minutes later Rory096 responded [6].
• One minute later GoldToeMarionette responded [7].
• Ten minutes later the unblock was denied [8]. Not much time was spent seeing if the the block was justified.

• At 5:21 GoldToeMarionette requested an unblock for a second time since obviously there was little consideration given to it [9].
• Enter Nlu with a speedy three minute review and response [10].
• In the same minute Nlu protected the page [11].

I suppose that is sufficient to demonstrate that it wasn't given a second thought as to its validity. Research was not done, no dialogue, just deny the unblock request, protect the page, the user will go away, who cares if the block was legitimate or not, just shut the user up, they must be stupid if they aren't an Admin.

What disgusting treatment. PoolGuy 04:57, 7 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

User:Rory096 is not an admin, but reiview of blocks doesn't take long, looking at the WP:RFCU page, checking the contribs of the user etc. etc. only takes a minute to two. --pgk^(talk) 07:39, 7 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps a bit more than a minute or two could have been given, because since March there is still the void of anyone finding a real violation of policy. PoolGuy 05:24, 8 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]